MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252374344 · doi:10.4230/lipics.ecoop.2015.76

Concrete Types for TypeScript

2015· preprint· en· W2252374344 on OpenAlexaff
Gregor Richards, Francesco Zappa Nardelli, Jan Vítek

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTypeScriptJavaScriptComputer scienceProgramming languageCompilerToolchainCode (set theory)Point (geometry)Software engineeringSet (abstract data type)Software

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Typescript extends JavaScript with optional type annotations that are, by design, unsound and, that the Typescript compiler discards as it emits code. This design point preserves programming idioms developers are familiar with, and allows them to leave their legacy code unchanged, while offering a measure of static error checking in parts of the program that have type annotations. We present an alternative design for TypeScript, one where it is possible to support the same degree of dynamism, but where types can be strengthened to provide hard guarantees. We report on an implementation, called StrongScript, that improves runtime performance of typed programs when run on a modified version of the V8 JavaScript engine.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.024

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207